Will voting for Liberals lower poverty, unemployment and the deficit?

[estesbob]

We know the answer as far a lowering abortion

 

[ChurchSoldier]

Why do you ask?

 

[sowinskija]

Not that it is vitally important from a spiritual perspective, but according to CNSnews and Politifact, the debt has doubled under the Obama admin. The unemployment rate is far higher than the Bush admin, and welfare spending has exploded, but let’s ask ourselves why… higher unemployment.

 

[B79]

Have not all three either stayed the same or increased under Obama?

I believe the unemployment rate was the SAME at the end of the Great Depression (w/ the New Deal implemented) as it was at the beginning.

It wouldn’t matter anyway – we cannot justify voting for candidates who are pro-abortion (or support other intrinsic evils, such as gay marriage). There is moral gray area when it comes to ways to fight poverty, etc.; not so with abortion, which is intrinsically evil and therefore never justifiable.

 

[TimothyIgnatius]

Isn’t war and killing just as intrinsically evil as abortion? I mean, abortion is killing and war is killing, where do we draw a distinction? Please do not construe this as me condoning abortion in any way, I do not.

Why is there not more pressure on Catholics to vote for Politicians who support peace? We have been a very warring country (the US) throughout our history, and I think a person would be hard pressed to convince the general public that all of them were just wars.

Consider the fact that these wars are directly linked to why we are in so much debt. I have a hard time believing God enjoys watching us use the he has given us (knowledge, science, technology) to kill and to harm each other. So much of the technology we use is either violent or frivolous. Think of how many world problems we might be able to solved if we used our technological innovativeness to solve world hunger instead of giving us atom bombs and facebook?

 

[B79]

Dear TimothyIgnatius,

You asked: ‘Isn’t war just as intrinsically evil as abortion?’ The answer per the Church is no. War is not intrinsically evil, just as capital punishment is not intrinsically evil. That’s not at all to say they’re insignificant – it simply means they’re not on a par with abortion. The Church teaches that under certain circumstances, both war and capital punishment may be justified or even necessary. This comes down to prudential judgments, much like how to fight poverty and fairly levy taxes. Abortion is not like this; rather it must be opposed by Catholics under all circumstances, including at the ballot box. God bless.

 

[TimothyIgnatius]

Dear TimothyIgnatius,

You asked: ‘Isn’t war just as intrinsically evil as abortion?’ The answer per the Church is no. War is not intrinsically evil, just as capital punishment is not intrinsically evil. That’s not at all to say they’re insignificant – it simply means they’re not on a par with abortion. The Church teaches that under certain circumstances, both war and capital punishment may be justified or even necessary. This comes down to prudential judgments, much like how to fight poverty and fairly levy taxes. Abortion is not like this; rather it must be opposed by Catholics under all circumstances, including at the ballot box. God bless.

The Church teaches just war and capital punishment as a last resort means, meaning all other possible venues must be explored before coming to that unfortunate reality. Can you in good conscience tell me that all the wars this country have been involved in have been just, last resort means? Killing in this sense must be just as bad as killing in any other sense, surely, because it is senseless and unjust? Not to mention the lasting negative affects of war on our poor children, being sent to fight and die for something they might not have had to.

God bless you also and thank you for your response, hope I didn’t come across as rude.

 

[estesbob]

The Church teaches just war and capital punishment as a last resort means, meaning all other possible venues must be explored before coming to that unfortunate reality. Can you in good conscience tell me that all the wars this country have been involved in have been just, last resort means? Killing in this sense must be just as bad as killing in any other sense, surely, because it is senseless and unjust? Not to mention the lasting negative affects of war on our poor children, being sent to fight and die for something they might not have had to.

God bless you also and thank you for your response, hope I didn’t come across as rude.

3. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.

Pope Benedict the XVI

 

[ChurchSoldier]

I think the original question was about poverty, unemployment and the deficit.

 

[TimothyIgnatius]

3. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.

Pope Benedict the XVI

I stand corrected, but my entire point was about poverty, unemployment, and the deficit. Poverty and unemployment are squarely connected to the deficit, which can be attributed to the unnecessary pursuit of war and arms.

 

[ChurchSoldier]

Yes, we would probably be better off economically if our government did not see themselves as the police force of the world.

 

[estesbob]

I stand corrected, but my entire point was about poverty, unemployment, and the deficit. Poverty and unemployment are squarely connected to the deficit, which can be attributed to the unnecessary pursuit of war and arms.

There really is no correlation between waging war and poverty\unemployment. in fact war is often a boon for the economy. War does add to the deficit but in amounts miniscule compared to those added waging the “war on poverty”

 

[ricmat]

Voting for liberals will not reduce poverty, unemployment, or the deficit.

History proves the opposite.

And after all, since the poor & unemployed are a main voting block for liberal politicians, if somehow the poor and unemployed were to become rich and employed, their voting block would disappear, and the liberal politicians would be out of a job. It is in the liberal’s best personal interest to ensure that there are always larger and larger numbers of poor and unemployed. More people to vote for him/her.

That’s also the reason that they think that uncontrolled immigration is good, and why giving college scholarships (in California at least) to illegal immigrants instead of legal residents is a good idea.

We are told to put our faith (trust) in God, and not in princes. We are told not to rely on anything man-made for security. The liberals desire just the opposite. Reliance / dependence on the government, and near-worship of the head of the government.

At least that’s the way it appears to me.

 

[TimothyIgnatius]

There really is no correlation between waging war and poverty\unemployment. in fact war is often a boon for the economy. War does add to the deficit but in amounts miniscule compared to those added waging the “war on poverty”

This, quite simply, is not true. The so-called “economic boon” from war is from the profiteering of weapons manufacturing, of which the US government has many, many, many contracts… I don’t understand how a Catholic could be unsympathetic to the plight of the poor… Also using war as a means for an “economic boom” is inherently evil. War is supposed to be a last resort, not a way to lace the CEO’s of weapon manufacture’s pockets.

 

[TimothyIgnatius]

We are told to put our faith (trust) in God, and not in princes

This is true, so why do you allow yourself to justify your clearly conservative ideologies with God? The Republican party is hardly the “Catholic” party…

We are called to actively seek peace, help the poor, heal the sick. Am I wrong?

 

[estesbob]

This, quite simply, is not true. The so-called “economic boon” from war is from the profiteering of weapons manufacturing, of which the US government has many, many, many contracts… I don’t understand how a Catholic could be unsympathetic to the plight of the poor… Also using war as a means for an “economic boom” is inherently evil. War is supposed to be a last resort, not a way to lace the CEO’s of weapon manufacture’s pockets.

Where did you get the idea a I am unsympathetic to the poor? I also didnt endorse war as an economy booster … Just stated the fact it often is, contrary to your assertion that ir caused poverty and unemployment in the US.

Ijusr happen to think a anti-poverty program based on killing children before they are born and imposing a cycle of dependency on those lucky enough to escape their mothers womb is not the way to go.

 

[estesbob]

This is true, so why do you allow yourself to justify your clearly conservative ideologies with God? The Republican party is hardly the “Catholic” party…

We are called to actively seek peace, help the poor, heal the sick. Am I wrong?

Yes we are… But we can not fulfill our obligation to do this by voting for someone who promises to take other peoples money and do it for us

 

[SuperLuigi]

We know the answer as far a lowering abortion

It will make all of those things worse.

The idea that government helps poor in the manner in which liberals portray is absurd and untrue.

Our “aid” to Africa has increased the poverty rate by ten times in some places.

And the war on poverty has done nothing. In fact, the rates have now increased since LBJ’s Great Society.

Liberals pro-regulation will hurt businesses and stunt innovation.

They also think that abortion is a “right”. There is no right to abortion in the Constitution and all Roe V Wade did was make it illegal for states to make abortion illegal, to quote Jason Lewis.

If people really results beyond the feel-good nonsense that is and probably will destroy what we now call the First World, then from CAF liberals to the Vatican, such individuals would be wise to look at the FACTS and all of the facts.

Otherwise, they will continue to embarrass themselves.

 

[TimothyIgnatius]

Yes we are… But we can not fulfill our obligation to do this by voting for someone who promises to take other peoples money and do it for us

You must make a ton of money, because only those in the very upper echelon are only now just beginning to be taxed more than the rest of the population, including the upper-middle and middle classes. Did the Lord not say “It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of Heaven”?

How exactly do you expect a solution to the perpetual, epidemic problem of poverty throughout the world? Start more wars so we can keep the economy going?

Not to mention, our armies are almost exclusively filled with those in the lower echelon of income. Who benefits?

The Republican party is NOT the Catholic party, nor is the Democratic party.

 

[Kal2012]

No - I live near Detroit, so I know what voting for Liberals/Democrats/Socialists looks like in the real world.

Most Liberals aren’t problem-solvers, but enablers. A lot of people are in denial that ‘business as usual’ needs to change to save the city.

Please note that I said most, not all. There are exceptions, but they are few and far between.

Liberal politicians talk a good game about wanting to help the poor, but their follow through leaves a lot to be desired. More money isn’t always the answer to every question/concern. Sadly, Conservative politicians don’t have an urban agenda that sufficiently addresses the needs of the poor. So, really the choice is “dumb or dumber”.

Conservative politicians need to actually answer people’s concerns to questions like, “so what’s going to happen to me if my aid is cut off and there are no businesses in the area to hire people like me?” ‘Let the free market work’ isn’t a sufficient response if your ration from the government is cut off and you aren’t able to work or don’t have job skills for the modern economy. It would be devastating to most cities if there was an even larger homeless population and still inadequate services for this population.

There are a lot of challenges that have to be addressed that are unique to this area. However, most people know where to put the blame, since elections are always about how Liberal do you want your Democrat and who’s not going to rock the boat too much.